MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051008724 · doi:10.1182/blood-2003-06-1852

Genetic control of myeloproliferation in BXH-2 mice

2003· article· en· W2051008724 on OpenAlexaff
Karine Turcotte

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicKruppel-like factors research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While studying the unique Nramp1 (Slc11a1)-independent susceptibility to Mycobacterium bovis (BCG) infection of BXH-2 mice, we noted that these mice develop important splenomegaly and enlargement of lymph nodes. Segregation analyses in several F2 crosses showed that splenomegaly segregates as a single recessive trait caused by a novel mutation in BXH-2, independent of the infection. Histologic and fluorescence-activated cell sorter (FACS) analyses indicated that splenomegaly is associated with a large increase in Mac1+/GR1+ (macrophage antigen-1+/granulocyte differentiation antigen 1+) granulocyte precursors in spleen, lymph nodes, and bone marrow, resembling a myeloproliferative syndrome. This is concomitant to extramedullary erythropoiesis in the spleen, as measured by proportion of Ter119+ erythroid cells. The locus controlling this myeloproliferative syndrome and splenomegaly was designated Myls and maps to an 18 centimorgan (cM) region of chromosome 8, which also contains an integrated copy of an N-ecotropic murine leukemia virus (MuLV) provirus (Emv2). The relationship between Myls, expansion of Mac1+/GR1+ cells, and Emv2 was investigated. Homozygosity at Myls is necessary but not sufficient for B-ecotropic virus replication in splenocytes, the extent of which appears to be under separate genetic control. Our results suggest a model in which Myls-dependent myeloproliferation in BXH-2 acts as a predisposing factor for the subsequent development of virally induced myeloid leukemia characteristic of this strain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicKruppel-like factors researchFrench-language works237,207